Accurate felt-tip pen brands classification based on a convolutional neural network using data augmentation

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL Journal of forensic sciences Pub Date : 2024-11-13 DOI:10.1111/1556-4029.15658
Xiaobin Wang PhD, Lei Yang MS, Ruili Chen PhD, Wei Guo PhD, Xun Han PhD, Aolin Zhang BS
{"title":"Accurate felt-tip pen brands classification based on a convolutional neural network using data augmentation","authors":"Xiaobin Wang PhD,&nbsp;Lei Yang MS,&nbsp;Ruili Chen PhD,&nbsp;Wei Guo PhD,&nbsp;Xun Han PhD,&nbsp;Aolin Zhang BS","doi":"10.1111/1556-4029.15658","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Ink analysis played an important role in document examination, but the limited dataset made it difficult for many algorithms to distinguish inks accurately. This article aimed to evaluate the feasibility of two data augmentation (DA) methods, Gaussian noise data augmentation (GNDA) and extended multiplicative signal augmentation (EMSA), for the classification of felt-tip pen ink brands. Four brands of felt-tip pens were analyzed using FT-IR spectroscopy. Five classification models were used, convolutional neural network (CNN), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA). The results showed that the datasets generated by GNDA and EMSA are similar to the original datasets and have some diversity. The EMSA method had optimal classification results when combined with CNN, with classification accuracy (ACC), precision (PRE), recall (REC) and F1 score reaching 99.86%, 99.87%, 99.86%, 99.86%, and 99.86%, compared with GNDA-CNN method (ACC = 80.90%, PRE = 87.34%, REC = 81.62%, F1 score = 79.23%). This study shows that when raw spectral data is small, DA methods can be combined with neural network models to identify ink brands effectively.</p>","PeriodicalId":15743,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic sciences","volume":"70 1","pages":"170-178"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1556-4029.15658","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ink analysis played an important role in document examination, but the limited dataset made it difficult for many algorithms to distinguish inks accurately. This article aimed to evaluate the feasibility of two data augmentation (DA) methods, Gaussian noise data augmentation (GNDA) and extended multiplicative signal augmentation (EMSA), for the classification of felt-tip pen ink brands. Four brands of felt-tip pens were analyzed using FT-IR spectroscopy. Five classification models were used, convolutional neural network (CNN), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA). The results showed that the datasets generated by GNDA and EMSA are similar to the original datasets and have some diversity. The EMSA method had optimal classification results when combined with CNN, with classification accuracy (ACC), precision (PRE), recall (REC) and F1 score reaching 99.86%, 99.87%, 99.86%, 99.86%, and 99.86%, compared with GNDA-CNN method (ACC = 80.90%, PRE = 87.34%, REC = 81.62%, F1 score = 79.23%). This study shows that when raw spectral data is small, DA methods can be combined with neural network models to identify ink brands effectively.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于卷积神经网络的毡尖笔品牌精确分类,采用数据增强技术。
墨水分析在文件检验中发挥着重要作用,但由于数据集有限,许多算法难以准确区分墨水。本文旨在评估两种数据增强(DA)方法--高斯噪声数据增强(GNDA)和扩展乘法信号增强(EMSA)--在毛毡笔墨水品牌分类中的可行性。使用傅立叶变换红外光谱分析了四个品牌的毛毡笔。使用了五种分类模型:卷积神经网络(CNN)、K-近邻(KNN)、支持向量机(SVM)、随机森林(RF)和偏最小二乘判别分析(PLS-DA)。结果表明,GNDA 和 EMSA 生成的数据集与原始数据集相似,并具有一定的多样性。与 GNDA-CNN 方法(ACC = 80.90%、PRE = 87.34%、REC = 81.62%、F1 分数 = 79.23%)相比,EMSA 方法在与 CNN 结合使用时具有最佳分类效果,分类准确率(ACC)、精确率(PRE)、召回率(REC)和 F1 分数分别达到 99.86%、99.87%、99.86%、99.86% 和 99.86%。这项研究表明,当原始光谱数据较少时,DA 方法可与神经网络模型相结合,有效识别油墨品牌。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of forensic sciences
Journal of forensic sciences 医学-医学:法
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
12.50%
发文量
215
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Forensic Sciences (JFS) is the official publication of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS). It is devoted to the publication of original investigations, observations, scholarly inquiries and reviews in various branches of the forensic sciences. These include anthropology, criminalistics, digital and multimedia sciences, engineering and applied sciences, pathology/biology, psychiatry and behavioral science, jurisprudence, odontology, questioned documents, and toxicology. Similar submissions dealing with forensic aspects of other sciences and the social sciences are also accepted, as are submissions dealing with scientifically sound emerging science disciplines. The content and/or views expressed in the JFS are not necessarily those of the AAFS, the JFS Editorial Board, the organizations with which authors are affiliated, or the publisher of JFS. All manuscript submissions are double-blind peer-reviewed.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Facing the future: Technology and “advocacy” at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences How specific is the specificity rule in duty to warn or protect jurisprudence following the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's Maas decision? Retraction: M. Ashton, N. Czado, M. Harrel, S. Hughes. “Genotyping strategies for tissues fixed with various embalming fluids for human identification, databasing, and traceability,” Journal of Forensic Sciences (Early View) https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.15414. Survey on forensic DNA biology training in forensic science service laboratories in the United States
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1